Talk:Champion of Torm
Bonus feat article Perhaps the CoT bonus feat list should a page on its own but referencing to the fighter bonus feat list is wrong imho because there are just too many differences. Also it would allow us to remove some of the notes (about ambidexterity, two-weapon fighting, great smiting). --Kamiryn 04:17, 11 January 2006 (PST) *I think it would be a good idea. --Countess Terra 08:10, 11 January 2006 (PST) Great Smiting note Removed the note about Great Smiting. It's an epic bonus feat and it's not the only epic feat on the CoT epic bonus feat list that's not on the fighter epic bonus feat list.--Kamiryn 00:47, 17 January 2006 (PST) Couple of feat questions Couple of Feat questions. Are non-epic bonus feats still available at epic levels? And if Torm is the patron of Paladins, why is Great Charisma not available as an Epic Bonus Feat? This would give Paladins a half-decent chance to actually meet some of the pre-requisites for those other hard-to-qualify-for bonus feats... Blacknight 09:17, 17 July 2006 (PDT) * Yes non epic are available at Epic. --pb, August 2006 Every three levels? On Epic Bonus Feats: the article says you get one every three levels, and then lists level progressions every four levels. Which is correct? -- Resonance 18:57, 11 August 2006 (PDT) * It's every four, thanks for pointing that out. --pb, August 2006 Stupid and useless? 82.208.33.253 deleted the following text with the explanation "Deleted something in notes which is absolutely stupid and useless..." http://nwn.wikia.com/index.php?title=Champion_of_Torm&curid=1166&diff=28136&oldid=26010 :The champion of Torm class is based on the PnP divine champion prestige class. However, while the divine champion class has a maximum level of 5 (similar to the Harper Scout level maximum), BioWare's class has no set limit other than that inherent to prestige class rules (max 30 levels, including epic levels). The distinguishing feature seems to be that the name champion of Torm suggests worship of the deity Torm, though this restriction is not actually enforced in the game. Jeff Marvin, BioWare Web Developer posted the following: "Champions of Torm are mighty warriors who dedicate themselves to Torm's cause, defending holy ground, destroying enemies of the church, and slaying mythical beasts." Presumably some gameworlds may further define this class with their scripts. I disagree. I think that's good information to include. I recommend restoring it. Any objections? -- Alec Usticke 23:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC) :I say restore it. Maybe put it in a special "Pen-and-paper notes" section so it doesn't look like a note for NWN gameplay. --The Krit 00:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC) ::Good suggestion. Done. -- Alec Usticke 03:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC) Unarmed Hey I was just wondering, you can't be a CoT with a weapon focus of Unarmed can you? --Karragin 01:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC) *Last I heard, NWN does not consider unarmed strike to be a melee weapon. If nothing has changed, then no, you cannot use weapon focus in unarmed strike to qualify for champion of Torm. --The Krit 17:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC) Table format Let me start by acknowledging this is minor. Where did the idea "Unless the text covers more than one line, a table cell should be only one line high" come from? I think the blank header cells look rather odd, worse than a header cell that is taller than required by its contents. --The Krit 01:23, 28 June 2008 (UTC) :I did the same with all the other tables, all the headers are now on a row, due to the existence of some double headers (the saves are always there but some tables also have other columns where this happens, such as in theMonk table) there needs to be a second header row, if the "feat" cell is a 2 row cell, then the word feat is no longer on the same line as "saves." Not to mention its a small word for a very big cell, looks messed up because the saves section is cramped and the feat word has a sea of room. :In addition, some headers contain a wider text than the data it describes, such as in the Blackguard table. Very conveniently, due to the fact that the double header row already exist, I can now place a break somewhere in such a header text and make it a double row cell, thus allowing for a more narrow column, while still making the table look in line with the other tables. --SevenMass 00:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC) :And yes, I admit I am a little bit obsessed with making things look neat, in rows and columns, in lines, and compact. --SevenMass 00:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC) :*One major weakness with this approach: When I look at this table, I still see "Feats" with significant space above and below. That's because at my window width, "HP range", "Save bonus", and "Divine wrath" are all on two lines (causing the empty cell beneath them to make even less sense). You can make the table look perfect on your screen, but if you try to micromanage the formatting like this, it's unlikely you'll make it look good on all screens. (That's one reason there's CSS -- to make it easier for each browser to produce something that looks good.) Let's see what you think of something else... --The Krit 10:34, 20 July 2008 (UTC) :*And yes, I know you did this on other tables. That's not an argument for keeping this format, but an indication of how many pages will be affected by the outcome here. --The Krit 10:39, 20 July 2008 (UTC) Scripting deities Does anyone know what the statement "Presumably some gameworlds may further define this class with their scripts." is supposed to describe? It is in the context of "Torm" not being enforced in the class, so my first impression is that the statement is that gameworlds can adjust the scripting that refers to Torm. Except there is no such scripting. The only link between this class and Torm is the name (which is a talk table issue, not a scripting one). --The Krit (talk) 04:17, March 31, 2014 (UTC) * I'm going to remove that statement. --The Krit (talk) 03:51, April 19, 2014 (UTC)